Tag Archives: guns

The police raids we are seeing … are they OTT have they made us any safer?

“Sadly, this is just the start…” an article on a January 2020 NZ police raid reads… “approximately 12 armed and uniformed goons from the Police metaphorically kicked in the doors of a young Christian family to search for a .22lr lever action rabbit rifle.”

A rabbit shooting weapon?

The start to weaponized state control of citizens was actually long before January 2020. More recently in 2007 we had NZ’s Tuhoe people raided in similar fashion but with a far worse ‘gung-ho’ modus operandi … boarding school buses dressed like Darth Vader, armed with guns and terrifying little children. Not a new scenario to Tuhoe …  this was a hundred odd years on from a very similar display of force with the raid on Rua Kenana’s community, peaceful people minding their own business. That one involved bloodshed and deaths and I recently learned they were required to pay (in money) for the cost of that raid. In the 2007 event armed offenders (Police) detained one family that included small children in their garage for hours on end with no food, water or toilet. Yes, this sinister fascism has been lurking for a very long time however it’s now emerging right in plain sight. The claim with the new weaponry, the protective gear, the armoured vehicles costing millions of dollars … and the new legislation … is that they are protecting the public. Really? How does that include terrifying little children? Something is very rotten in the state of Enzed and folk are noticing.

RELATED:  In NZ’s frenzied quest for gun seizures a 12 YO girl is still shaken after 30 armed Police raided her family’s property & pointed a gun at her

Here is another raid from 2018 (so prior to the March 2019 event in Christchurch which sparked the new gun laws). In this one the father of two hands over his guns very willingly in order to prevent them kicking in the door whilst his children are in the bathroom with their mother terrified and crying.
Family holed up in Pukekohe home during armed police standoff

Then in August 2019 a Huntly mother and children were left traumatized after police wearing masks, some carrying guns woke them at 5am, a mother who had recently been in a hui with the police about pastoral care and the community. You’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t it seems.

Fruitless police raid leaves Huntly family shaken

Interesting times we are living in.

And so in the article we had the raid on January 9th that the raided believe was politically motivated. You can read the detail on that for yourself. At the end of the day, these raids are becoming noticeable world wide, and have been for a while now. The common factor is the use of the armoured vehicles and over the top numbers and weaponry. Shooting butterflies with automatic weapons as it were. See below here an image from  thefreeonline.wordpress.com featuring the hardware used to evict some women squatters from a house in the US! An armoured vehicle almost twice the height of a man, to evict some squatters. Slight over kill isn’t it?

RELATED:  Three academics from Victoria University’s Institute of Criminology explain why armed police officers in patrol cars will in fact make us less safe

I would have to say that since the event of nearly a year ago now that kicked off the gun confiscations, in spite of arming the police & their vehicles, that we seem to have seen more shootings NZ wide. Something experts from Victoria University warned of.

free online wp dot com

After Hundreds Mobilize to Defend Occupied Home, Riot Police Evict Mothers With Tanks & Robot

Kind of over the top you’d agree? What are they trying to ‘tell’ us with all of this? It’s rather like the colonial days and their ‘gunboat diplomacy’ isn’t it?

We’ve been seeing this growing trend for a while, by small increments so as you won’t notice. It’s not the constabulary  ‘protection’ we knew of decades past.

another raid: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12257380

e208635d50f9a84dbf37ce21dd86a676
Gone are these days in NZ

READ THE ARTICLE CONCERNING THE RABBIT GUN RAID:

https://thebfd.co.nz/2020/01/trust-in-police-destroyed-by-politically-motivated-raid-against-young-family/?ct=t%28RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN%29&mc_cid=2b1c417e4a&mc_eid=60f36909d3&fbclid=IwAR1OwEpNuI2giILacffuB_D9PbvjpM5N3u5ro7e6_zc18-gI2PvCfyU5r9I

 

 

 

Three academics from Victoria University’s Institute of Criminology explain why armed police officers in patrol cars will in fact make us less safe

From newsroom.co.nz

Victoria University of Wellington’s Simon Mackenzie, Trevor Bradley, Angus Lindsay explain why armed cops in cars is a bad idea 

The new trial of Armed Response Teams (ARTs) in Counties Manukau, Waikato and Canterbury involves sending at least three armed police officers out in patrol vehicles to be constantly available to respond to crimes involving firearms. Currently, police do have armed offender squad officers, but they are dispatched from base to respond to serious firearms incidents rather than being continually present in the community.

The police commissioner has given two justifications for this trial of roving armed cops in cars: community safety and the safety of police officers themselves. The second reason is the real driver, but it will inevitably come at the expense of the first. Cops in cars with guns makes communities less safe, not more. Let’s look at the evidence.

Does the prospect of armed police officers dissuade criminals from using guns? No. In fact, the opposite may be true. This is the mutual escalation argument: where cops carry guns, criminals think they need to as well, and more shootouts ensue. The more criminals respond in this way, the more police think they need to arm themselves, and so on. In the United States, this pattern has become so problematic that there is a growing argument for de-escalation by disarming police, but disarming an armed police force is much more difficult than not allowing arms to be routinely used in the first place. Once the genie is out of the bottle, it is hard to put back in.

Okay, so arming police doesn’t actually make us safer, but do armed police nonetheless make communities feel safer? The evidence is mixed. While some people may feel safer when they see police with guns, some feel less safe. They worry about being shot by accident or unjustifiably, and the ambience created by seeing guns on the street is to some people an oppressive, rather than a liberating, one.

Does police use of firearms have a racially disproportionate impact? Yes. In a recent article for RNZ, ex-police officer Tim McKinnel pointed out that in the 10 years from January 2009 to January 2019, 66 percent of all New Zealanders shot (fatally and non-fatally) by police were Māori or Pasifika. Around 23 percent of New Zealanders identify as Māori and Pasifika, so that police shooting statistic is quite an indictment.

In the US, around 30 percent of people fatally shot by police are black Americans, while black Americans make up only 13 percent of the overall population. This is explained less by police officer racial bias, although in some cases that does exist, and more by differences in rates of exposure to police. ‘Exposure’ here means visibility and contact, whether through committing crimes or being ‘over-policed’, as we know indigenous and minority populations around the world are. In other words, the fatal shooting statistic is a form of indirect discrimination rather than outright racial bias by individual officers. But the effects – more dead black Americans – are the same. Those differences in rates of exposure to police are also what Māori and Pasifika experience in New Zealand, where Māori are almost eight times more likely than Pākehā to suffer police violence. The likely racial footprint of armed police in the community is there for all to see.

Are police entitled to protect themselves at the expense of citizen safety by carrying weapons? Surely not. The police sign up to be put in harm’s way. It is a reasonably foreseeable part of the job, where the job involves resolving conflict in society in a direct way and in circumstances that are often challenging. Policing is not an inherently safe business. It is sensible to manage those risks as much as possible, of course, but at some point the measures police might take to protect themselves spill over into making everyone else less safe. ARTs bring police guns continuously and routinely into communities and increase the danger to innocent civilians of being shot by police. They will also increase the risk of police shooting unarmed offenders and those carrying weapons other than firearms.

In fact, the evidence shows that, perhaps contrary to the common-sense expectations underpinning the ART trial, carrying guns or other weapons like TASERs doesn’t make police officers safer in the line of duty. The way to make officers safer is to reduce rates of violent crime, especially crimes involving firearms. Prevention is the key, not more shooting.

Does the New Zealand experience with TASERs give us reassurance that, contrary to the apparent international experience, more police guns in the community will enhance community safety here? No. TASERs were touted as a less lethal alternative to police guns. Yet they have not reduced the number of police shootings, and they have been catalysts for the escalation of police aggression. By a simple multiplication effect, more police weapons in society has led to a greater likelihood that they will be used. That much is simple statistical probability but there is also a so-called ‘weapons effect’, studied in social psychology. This finds that carrying weapons affects police behaviour, increasing aggressive responses to challenging situations. It can also increase the aggression of the offender being apprehended. A study in the United Kingdom recently found that the presence of a TASER was causally linked to a 48 percent higher incidence of force being used by police and also that assaults on police doubled where they had a TASER. This study shows the weapons effect in action: the presence of a TASER leads to increased aggression for both the public and police.

New Zealand is a society in which the liberal democratic traditions of policing should be absolutely at the forefront of decisions about how the police carry out their mandate. Those liberal democratic traditions involve policing by consent, in other words with the support of the population. This support and co-operation is the source of policing’s legitimacy. Trust and confidence in the police may be broadly evident in the Pākehā population of New Zealand but police–community relations are often strained and in some cases tenuous for Māori given their disproportionate entanglement in criminal justice. Studies in the US show that militarised police tactics, including the use of firearms, fuel historic tensions between police and marginalised communities rather than reducing those tensions. Think, for one example, about the riots in Ferguson, Missouri after police fatally shot Michael Brown and the ensuing civil disobedience campaigns.

The cutting edge of policing research internationally is about increasing the trust and confidence communities have in police, which supports the liberal democratic consensus about police legitimacy and pays dividends to police in terms of community safety and improved results. The Police Minister has even recently set as one of the key goals for the police that 90 percent of New Zealanders have trust and confidence in them. Where the research is telling us a high level of militarised policing erodes public trust and confidence in the police, while simultaneously failing to enhance officer safety and reduce crime, it is concerning to see ideas like ARTs being developed. This is especially so for a police force that, like so many internationally, has an ingrained problem with racially disparate effects.

Professor Simon Mackenzie, Dr Trevor Bradley and Master’s student Angus Lindsay are in the Institute of Criminology at Victoria University of Wellington. 

ARE YOU ON ‘THE LIST’?

By Carol Sawyer

Free speech is under threat in NZ.

monitoring-1305045_1280.jpgLike many of you, I was born into a New Zealand where people did not lock their doors. Now, many people have security lights, CCTV cameras, burglar alarms, and some are starting to have phones at the ready to video armed policemen coming to their homes.

I am posting up all the links I have so far on these events in the last couple of weeks. I am sure there are more than these… this will be the tip of the iceberg.

What we know:

We know that the police have a list of at least 100 people they are watching.. for what we don’t quite know. They won’t tell us. (I am sure the number will be higher than 100 though). Here is an interview about this by Sean Plunket with Stephen Franks of the Free Speech Coalition on May 8, 2019:

 

At least two people, who have committed no crime other than to own an AR15, have had 14 and 30 armed police, respectively, arrive at their door unannounced. It appears they bought these guns in the rush of people buying the guns before the legislation changed and they were banned. Gun City reported a rush on sales, so these two are two of many. They were presumably not planning to commit mass murder! There is an amnesty on these guns until September 30th. Maybe it doesn’t apply to guns bought since the massacre. This seems unclear. I have asked gun-owners and no-one seems to know.

The stories of these two people are here:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/…/police-seize-gun-collectors-firea…

https://waikanaewatch.org/…/05/10/more-mad-government-ant…/…

https://www.odt.co.nz/rural-life/rural-people/claim-police-raids-over-top?fbclid=IwAR201eoqj1M5GN0F-alVkUNpy2IoO7iDKimsfYceE7YviLUSXOJ-MxF76d0

https://envirowatchrangitikei.wordpress.com/2019/05/12/in-nzs-frenzied-quest-for-gun-seizures-a-12-yo-girl-is-still-shaken-after-30-armed-police-raided-her-familys-property-pointed-a-gun-at-her/?fbclid=IwAR1YXdEAk7DBHmhWyAZqOnVowX4Vq8_P1vgOpB81_AHF2JZHGYTLVTUSk48

As well as this, people who own no guns and have committed no crimes, have been visited by armed police – one of them by 15 armed police. The reason for one of the visits appears to have been that the man was making Youtube videos and the government didn’t like his political views.

Their stories are here:

https://www.facebook.com/napoleon.ardern/videos/121954895660812/

https://waikanaewatch.org/…/what-happens-to-those-who-spe…/…

 

 

So… some visits are about guns and some are about political views. They all seem to have one thing in common though. The people visited are being questioned by police about their political and religious beliefs… about what they think of Jacinda Ardern, about Trump, about Muslims and other religions, whether they have friends in ethnic minorities, and the like.

***************************************************

On May 10, 2019, I spoke to Travis Mills, Private Secretary ( Police ), about this matter. He told me, and I quote:

“It is highly unlikely that police would be questioning people’s political preferences. Who you vote for is not a matter for NZ Police.”

Therefore if this has happened, you need to lay a complaint with the Independent Police Conduct Authority ( IPCA). Phone 0800-503-728, or fill in an online complaint form at www.ipca.govt.nz

*************************************************

The NZ Police do need to tell us what The List is about, and what “misdemeanours” will cause you to end up on The List.
Anti-1080 people, including myself, have already been spied on by government agents. Here is the story that broke on the Spy Files, March 10, 2019 :

https://www.radionz.co.nz/…/doc-s-chats-with-thompson-and-c…

Presumably at least some Anti-1080 people are on The List, as well as Anti-vaccine people, and people who would like us to be One nation/ One people (that is now called “hate speech” by Justice Minister Andrew Little). In fact anyone who speaks out against government policies or Jacinda Ardern had better watch out.

The only thing George Orwell got wrong was the date!

 

orwell 1000.png

 

 

Grooming our kids for war? … the NZ Army takes guns into a PRIMARY school

I would say this must take the moron award for the year quite frankly. We know how in the US pocket (see here also) our government/corporation is witness the recent goings on with the weapons giants (known more popularly and respectably as ‘defense’ corporations) like the one that is financially partnering with the rocket base operation in Mahia, also funded with $15 mill of your tax dollars). Then we had war celebrations last year that pretty much buried our nuclear free status. All advertised with a touch of bling. Follow the money trail. Our esteemed leaders recently gave $20 billion to the ‘defense’ industry, whilst ignoring 41K homeless & our new status on the UNICEF’s child poverty index. No shame whatsoever.

war 23.png
Advertisement for the ‘weapons fest’ held last year for the ‘defense’ industry at $10K+ per ticket depending on your budget
war 5.png
More advertising ‘bling’ from the ‘defense’ website’s video presentation for the event last year … all about buying weapons under the banner of defense … wars make money

So why are they taking weapons to primary school children? What springs to mind for me is preparing the young mind (early) for recruitment although that is quickly dismissed as the motive in the news item. Part of a leadership course they say. Sure, teach kids to lead … with GUNS? Really? Why is the military teaching leadership & why

images.jpg
Children are the innocent victims of war

with guns? Hasn’t there been enough strife in schools with guns? Who needs them? Watch the video and see the kids’ reactions. “Amazing and cool” (to hold the weapons). Very young and impressionable minds. Note they are not being shown images of bloody children and their families from war torn countries. Or told (presumably) of the remote killing done by drones … from an armchair. Just the glitzy, amazing, cool weapons … for now.

The other rationale for this that occurs is ‘normalizing’ and ‘glorifying’ the presence of guns and military. We’ve seen this in recent years more and more with the many drills we have going on with troops from all over the planet (the new global village – interdependence it’s called) playing out war games right in our midst. The new global village is simply the new world order announced publicly by US president Bush Snr after the Gulf War, and other world leaders since then. This new presence of the military in the public’s midst is totally unnecessary. We can be defended quite adequately without all of that publicity. I recall as a child passing through the Desert Road occasionally, when we looked out excitedly for the possible (and rare) sighting of a tank doing war practice. Now they are venturing into our towns with their war ‘games’, making it look like fun. We need to be asking ourselves ‘why?’ Our esteemed Police have morphed from the friendly country constable to something out of star wars, storm troopers with flak jackets and weapons. Witness the Tuhoe raids in 2007 where these characters not only stopped and entered school buses frightening the life out of little school kids, they also escorted young children outside with guns to their heads and detained them in their garage without food or water for nine hours. (Note though, they did bring in a van load of provisions but only for themselves. Great leadership skills guys). Watch the video at the link. Far from the public eye they were basically traumatizing and ill treating young impressionable kids. A far cry from the so-called ‘leadership training’ touted as the rationale for handing guns out at primary schools. Okay this was the Police and not the military but you would have to be blind not to see the blurring of lines occurring.

 

Our esteemed Police have morphed from the friendly country constable to something out of star wars

war19
‘Interdependence’, from Defense’s blingy advertisement, the new ‘global village’ concept

So … guns in primary schools? Not a good sign in my opinion. Call me paranoid if you will but I see it as very sinister. They might have squeaked by in upper level high school but primary? Not good & I’m pleased to hear they’re nipping it in the bud. Read the article and hold those who are molding the minds of your kids accountable.

 

 

EnvirowatchRangitikei

 

The article from stuff

school guns.png
Children at Whakarongo School Palmerston North with army weapons [Photo credit: Stuff.co.nz]

Education Minister to shut down guns in schools after army gave rifles to children

Kids using rifles in schools is completely legal – for now.

But that is set to change in about four months time when Education Minister Nikki Kaye introduces clear guidelines outlining when it’s appropriate for firearms to be on school grounds.

Several MPs raised the issue of guns in schools with Kaye after a Stuff story in April revealed the army allowed 9 to 13-year-olds to get their hands on unloaded guns and learn how to assemble and fire an assault rifle. However Kaye says she’s “pretty conservative” when it comes to guns in schools and as a “general rule” she doesn’t support it.

“It was drawn to my attention that there was a situation the other day where the army brought some rifles into schools and that’s absolutely allowed under the law.

“I’ve asked whether there are any guidelines in this area and it’s clear there aren’t, so I’ve asked the Ministry of Education and NZSTA (New Zealand School Trustees Association) to work on some guidelines.”

At the time of the school visit Corporal Israel McNicholl said, “kids just love the guns, you know what kids are like … but they are not toys”.

READ MORE